Offers insights into the state’s 600,000-plus adolescents from professionals who work with them every day and from teens themselves. The success of today’s teens is particularly important because of the aging of society and Arizona’s high “dependency ratio,” or the number of children and seniors in relation to those of working age. Arizona has the nation’s second highest rate. Arizona’s teens have aspirations. The question is whether Arizona will help young people with public policies that address risks, reward achievements, and expand opportunities.

“What about the water?” was one of the questions Morrison Institute for Public Policy asked in its 2008 study, "Megapolitan: Arizona’s Sun Corridor". That report looked at the potential growth of the Sun Corridor as Tucson and Phoenix merge into one continuous area for economic and demographic purposes.

With its brief review of the water situation in urban Arizona, "Megapolitan" left a number of questions unanswered. This report will consider questions like these in more detail in order to examine the Sun Corridor’s water future. This topic has received less sophisticated public discussion than might be expected in a desert state. Arizona’s professional water managers feel they are relatively well prepared for the future and would like to be left alone to do their job. Elected officials and economic-development professionals have sometimes avoided discussing water for fear of reinforcing a negative view of Arizona. This report seeks to contribute to this understanding, and to a more open and informed conversation about the relationship of water and future growth.

Raising Arizona was the challenge of the 20th century. Sustaining Arizona is now the challenge of the 21st. A crucial part of that task is not just understanding today’s knowledge economy, but mastering it.
If the state makes this fundamental transition, the brief history of Arizona’s future will read simply: They succeeded in the second stage. Human capital took its rightful place as a chief component of competitiveness. As a result, the story will go, Arizona moved into the top ranks of economic leadership after years in the second tier. Equity and prosperity resulted too. Most important, the state was ready for the next stage of competition. This happy ending for Arizona, of course, has been envisioned repeatedly over time. And in fact, a variety of human capital policies and programs to achieve it are in place. However, many would say that human capital is an area of unfinished business for Arizona. The Arizona Minority Education Policy Analysis Center (AMEPAC) developed "To Learn and Earn" to highlight the issues and asked Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University to support the effort with research and analysis. In turn, AMEPAC will present the issues to Arizona stakeholders for their feedback. This process will kick off a multi-partner series of policy action projects. The first results will be presented in November 2009 at the next human capital conference presented by the Arizona Commission for Postsecondary Education.

This research study clearly articulates the critical need for industry to work in conjunction with educators in order to develop an emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) in our schools systems. This partnership is essential for creating a competitive global workforce in Arizona. Aggressive action must be taken now, to fuel the growth of our economy with a properly educated workforce that will improve our standard of living. Changing our culture to celebrate innovation requires a comprehensive plan and collaboration between business, academia and our government. We have an obligation to our children and our country to support this initiative with our time, funds and energy.

Arizonans have gained a reputation for their low opinion of government, despite -- or perhaps because of -- the major role played by all governmental levels in residents’ daily lives. This view was reflected in the responses to this segment of the survey, as panelists generally gave low ratings to the government services they were asked to judge. This was especially true of lower-income panelists. But the respondents’ low ratings might not always have been based upon personal experience: Few panelists said they had sought information from government or community agencies. This may be due to the increasing popularity of the Internet as a self-help source, but it could also mean that relatively few residents need the services or know they are available. In any case, more than half of those who did seek information said they were satisfied with the result. Panelists were not dismissive of all collective efforts at social betterment. They expressed high levels of agreement that good community-based programs can prevent many social problems, from drug and alcohol addiction to child abuse and juvenile delinquency. Asked how they themselves would distribute public funds for social problems, most respondents choose programs for children, affordable housing, and health insurance.

States have always administered federal programs. But, states usually have had very little say in how they carried out programs. All states could generally do was follow the rules laid out by federal agencies. But now, devolution is giving states more power over programs. And, in general, Americans have said that they approve of the idea. A 1998 nationwide poll, funded by The W. K. Kellogg Foundation, showed that a majority of Americans perceive devolution to be a positive development for the country.